fragmentation
Latest
Counterpoint: fragmentation won't destroy Android after all
The common belief -- and a belief we've generally shared here at Engadget -- is that Google's breakneck pace of development and lackadaisical stance toward heavily-customized versions of Android is slowly undermining the platform from the inside out. Handset manufacturers simply aren't used to the concept of two or more major revisions of an operating system in the span of 12 months, and it's got the potential to wreak havoc; there's probably no better example of this than HTC's Sense, where many of the world's Hero owners continue to plod along on Android 1.5 to this very day. Ultimately, this means that different Android users have access to different subsets of features and applications -- and looking at the big picture, it could mean that potential buyers are going to be subject to more paralysis at the sales counter than they'd be knowing that they've got a more futureproof device in their hands. Theoretically, anyway. Thing is, even as Android becomes more fragmented, it's also becoming more of a consumer product. Gone are the days when the ultra-geeky G1 was your only ticket to ride; now you've got dozens of choices, including high-end, heavily-marketed phones on American carriers like the Droid Incredible, Backflip, myTouch 3G Slide, and EVO 4G. What that means is that carriers and manufacturers are both successfully turning the conversation away from the platform, the technology, and the politics of Android -- subjects that your average phone buyer couldn't possibly care less about -- and turning it toward things that actually sell devices in volume: sex appeal, speed, and easy access to services like Facebook and Twitter. This phenomenon was demonstrated for us this week on the Engadget Mobile podcast, where our special guest (and podcast producer) Trent Wolbe -- a guy who isn't the unabashed phone nerd that I am -- told us on no uncertain terms that the lack of Froyo on the EVO 4G at launch is a complete non-issue for him. It makes sense: if a phone does everything you need it to do, and it does those things extraordinarily well, who really cares? Well, as technology writers, it's easy for us to care (in fact, it's our job to care) and to get swept up in the notion that having the latest and greatest is absolutely critical to our enjoyment of a product, but in reality, your average EVO 4G buyer might not even know what Android 2.2 is, much less understand why he or she should want it. We're not advocating that HTC and others slack off on keeping up with Google, of course -- or that Google shouldn't consider slowing down a smidge as Android's core matures -- but there's definitely an argument to be made that we're all going to enjoy the cream of this year's Android crop, Froyo / Gingerbread or otherwise.
Entelligence: Is Android fragmented or is this the new rate of innovation?
Entelligence is a column by technology strategist and author Michael Gartenberg, a man whose desire for a delicious cup of coffee and a quality New York bagel is dwarfed only by his passion for tech. In these articles, he'll explore where our industry is and where it's going -- on both micro and macro levels -- with the unique wit and insight only he can provide. A few weeks ago I sat down with the father of Android, Andy Rubin. Andy's a super smart person, having done stints at Apple, General Magic, WebTV and Danger before starting the Android project. We talked about a lot of things, and we particularly spent time discussing Android fragmentation. I've written in the past about my concern that the Android platform is fragmenting much like desktop Linux has over the years, and the potential for the platform to turn into a patchwork of devices and vendor specific modifications that bear little relationship with each other. I've spent a lot of time thinking about my conversation with Andy, and I've rewritten this column more than a few times as a result. Today, there are at least five different versions of Android on the market. Many of them are highly customized to allow for new features and device differentiation, but that same customization also makes it harder for vendors to update them to the latest versions. New releases and versions of Android are often outdated by newer versions in the span of just a few weeks. For example, the Nexus One when released was capable of running apps like Google Earth that devices such as the Droid could not, because it ran Android 2.0, not 2.1.Tablet vendors complain their Android offerings lack features such as Android Market because Google forbids them to install the marketplace app, forcing them to create proprietary alternatives. It would appear Android is indeed fragmenting -- but perhaps there are other forces at work. When I spoke with Andy, he pointed out there are several classical symptoms of platform fragmentation. First, older APIs no longer work and break in new releases. Second, multiple application marketplaces offer different applications that lack uniformity across platforms. Both of these are true when you look at desktop Linux. Neither are true of Android.
Android 2.1 becomes most used version, just in time to be obviated by Froyo
Rejoice, oh Android lovers. Thy OS of choice has finally graduated to the point where its latest variant is also the most used -- a statistic that is likely to last for only a day given Google's intent to reveal Android 2.2, or Froyo, at its I/O conference tomorrow. For the first time since El Goog's been keeping these platform version stats, 2.1 has risen above 1.5, the previous incumbent, having grown from 32.4 percent on May 3 (chart after the break) to 37.2 percent on May 17. This rapid ascension can only be expected to accelerate with more devices getting their Eclair permissions slips, and let's not forget that Google will be trying its hardest with 2.2 to make upgrades easier for phone makers to implement. Onwards and upwards we go. [Thanks, Chris D]
Exclusive: Android Froyo to take a serious shot at stemming platform fragmentation
We had a couple people at CTIA last week -- people whose words carry weight -- tell us off the record that the next major version of Android would take big strides toward stopping the ugly trend toward severe fragmentation that has plagued the platform for much of this and last year. You know, the kind of fragmentation that has already left users running not one, not two, not three, but four distinct versions of the little green guy (1.5, 1.6, 2.0, and 2.1) depending on a seemingly arbitrary formula of hardware, carrier, region, software customization, and manufacturers' ability to push updates in a timely fashion. Put simply, Google's been iterating the core far faster than most of its partners have been able to keep up. Thing is, in light of our CTIA conversations, we didn't have an idea of how Google planned on fixing this -- until now. We've been given reason to believe that the company will start by decoupling many of Android's standard applications and components from the platform's core and making them downloadable and updatable through the Market, much the same as they've already done with Maps. In all likelihood, this process will take place over two major Android versions, starting with Froyo and continuing through Gingerbread. Notice that we said apps and components, meaning that some core elements of Android -- input methods, for instance -- should get this treatment. This way, just because Google rolls out an awesome new browser doesn't mean you need to wait for HTC, Samsung, or whomever made your phone to roll it into a firmware update, and for your carrier to approve it -- almost all of the juicy user-facing stuff will happen through the Market. The second part of this doubled-edged attack on platform fragmentation comes from a simple reality: we're hearing that Google may be nearing the end of its breakneck development pace on Android's core and shifting attention to apps and features. By the time we get to Froyo, the underlying platform -- and the API that devs need to target -- will be reaching legitimate maturity for the first time, which means we should have far fewer tasty treat-themed code names to worry about over the course of an average year. We like awesome new software as much as the next guy, but Google's been moving so fast lately that they've created a near constant culture of obsolescence anxiety among the hardcore user base -- and in turn, that leads to paralysis at the sales counter. How much of this strategy actually materializes -- and how effective it is at changing the direction of the platform at large -- remains to be seen, but it sounds like a promising turn of events. Considering it's been a solid five months since the Eclair SDK premiered, that's an eternity in Google years; time to shake things up a bit, we reckon.
Entelligence: Will Android fragmentation destroy the platform?
Entelligence is a column by technology strategist and author Michael Gartenberg, a man whose desire for a delicious cup of coffee and a quality New York bagel is dwarfed only by his passion for tech. In these articles, he'll explore where our industry is and where it's going -- on both micro and macro levels -- with the unique wit and insight only he can provide. My friend and colleague Harry McCracken recently bought a brand new Droid from Motorola. He says it's a "loaf of day old bread." He's right. The Droid and Android 2.0 were introduced with much fanfare in December, but have already been eclipsed by Android 2.1 running on Google's Nexus One, and there are some serious ramifications for being behind. For example, Google recently touted the latest mobile version of Google Earth, which is a cool app that you won't be able to use unless you're running 2.1. Sure, Google says "Google Earth will be available in Android Market on most devices that have Android 2.1 or later versions," but that's most, not every. And what does Google mean when it says "as devices like the Droid get updated..." to 2.1? When will they get updated? Is it any wonder that some Android users are starting to get pangs of buyers remorse? When Android was announced, I wrote that if "Google can deliver, the impact could be huge," but I caveated a major issue: Google would need to prevent the market from fragmenting and allow it to succeed where other mobile and desktop Linux implementations had failed. Linux fragmentation remains one of the many reasons the open-source OS has failed to capture a meaningful share of the PC desktop market, and Android is rapidly following a similar path by fragmenting into different versions with different core feature sets, different users experiences and run different applications.
